A Scale Development Study: Gynecologic Cancer Prevention Information Scale

Year 2021, Volume: 11 Issue: 1, 9 - 13, 31.03.2021

Mine Bekar Gulbahtiyar Demirel Funda Evcılı Adem Doganer

https://doi.org/10.33808/clinexphealthsci.647862

Cited By: 3

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study is to develop a valid and reliable measurement tool to determine the knowledge level of women about gynecologic cancer prevention.

Methods: This study is of the methodological research type. The number of draft scale items in this study is 50. Women were taken to sample 10 times for each item (500 women) and pre-test was applied to 125 women which was 25% of the sample. The scale was re-applied to the first pre-test group after 3 weeks by test-retest method. The data were collected by using the Personal Information Form and Gynecologic Cancer Prevention Information Scale. The suitability of the data for factor analysis was investigated by the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin coefficient and by Barlett's test of sphericity. In order to test the construct validity of the scale, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were performed.

Results: Content validity index of the draft scale was 94%. Kaiser Meyer Olkin test value was 0.902 and the sample was found to be adequate and appropriate. On the other hand, the Bartlett test was obtained as X2=9542.07 p<0.001 and it was accepted that the scale fulfilled the requirements for exploratory factor analysis. The scale took its final form and consisted of 35 items and 5 sub-dimensions as a result of the exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. Total percentage of variance explained of 5 factors was 66.53%. That the cronbach alpha coefficients of the scale have high coefficients of 0.82-0.95 and that the test-retest values have coefficients of 0.566-0.881 and the Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the scale was 0.951.

Conclusion: The data obtained from this study reveal that scale is a valid and reliable measurement tool to determine the knowledge level of women about gynecologic cancer prevention.

Keywords

Gynecologic cancer, information, prevention, scale, women

References

• [1] Ilhan N, Batmaz N, Akhan LU. Healthy lifestyle behaviors of university students. Maltepe University Journal of Nursing Science and Art. 2010;3(3):43−44.
• [2] Beydag KD, Ugur E, Sonakin C, et al. The effect of health and life course on healthy life behaviors of university students. Gumushane University Journal of Health Sciences. 2014;3(1):599−609.
• [3] World Health Organization (WHO). Global action plan for the prevention and control of NCDs 2013-2020. Noncommunicable Diseases and Mental Health; 2013: Available at: http://www.who.int/nmh/events/ncd_action_plan/en/
• [4] World Health Organization (WHO). Cancer prevention. Cancer; 2018: Available at: http://www.who.int/cancer/prevention/en/
• [5] World Health Organization (WHO). Cancer country profiles 2014. Cancer; 2014: Available at: http://www.who.int/cancer/country-profiles/en/
• [6] Ministry of Health of the Republic of Turkey. Turkey Cancer Statistics; 2015: Available at:https://hsgm.saglik.gov.tr/depo/birimler/kanserdb/istatistik/Turkiye_Kanser_Istatistikleri_2015.pdf
• [7] Eroglu K, Koc G. Gynecological cancer control and nursing. Journal of Hacettepe University Faculty of Nursing. 2014;1:77−90.
• [8] Aydogdu SG, Bekar M. Determination of knowledge and behaviors of female university students about gynecological cancers. Turkish Journal of Gynecologic Oncology. 2016;4:25−32.
• [9] Bekar M, Guler H, Evcili F, et al. Determining the knowledge of women and their attitudes regarding gynecological cancer prevention. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention. 2013;14:6055−6059.
• [10] Okumus H, Cicek O, Tokat MA. Current situation in gynecological oncology nursing. Journal of Women's Health Nursing. 2015;2:1−12.
• [11] Savas HG, Taskin L. Determining nurse-midwives’ knowledge of the pap-smear test and their rate of being tested in Turkey. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention. 2011;12:1353−1360.
• [12] Ranabhat S, Tiwari M, Dhungana G, et al. Association of knowledge, attitude and demographic variables with cervical pap smear practice in Nepal. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014;15:8905−8910.
• [13] Saridi M, Kapogeorgou E, Rekleiti M, et al. Knowledge and attitudes of women regarding gynaecological cancer prevention in an urban area of Greece in financial crisis. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences. 2017;31:710−717.
• [14] Silveira NSP, Vasconcelos CTM, Nicolau AIO, et al. Knowledge, attitude and practice of the smear test and its relation with female age. Revista Latino-Americana De Enfermagem. 2016;24:e2699.
• [15] Weston C, Page R, Jones-Schubart K, et al. Improving cancer screening for underserved women through an FNP Student-Led Clinic. The Journal for Nurse Practitioners. 2018;14:e101-e104.
• [16] Cattell RB. The Scientific Use of Factor Analysis in Behavioral and Life Sciences. New York: Springer; 1978: Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-2262-7.
• [17] Comrey AL, Lee HB. A First Course in Factor Analysis. Second Edition, New York: Routledge; 2009.
• [18] MacCallum RC, Widaman KF, Zhang S, et al. Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods. 1999;4:84−99.
• [19] Kline RB. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. Second Edition, New York: The Guilford Press; 2005.
• [20] Yesilyurt S, Capraz C. A road map for the content validity used in scale development studies. Journal of Erzincan University Education Faculty. 2018;20:251−262.
• [21] Yurdugul H. Use of content validity indices for scope validity in scale development studies. XIV. National Educational Sciences Congress. Denizli: Pamukkale University; 2005: Available at: http://yunus.hacettepe.edu.tr/~yurdugul/3/indir/PamukkaleBildiri.pdf
• [22] Buyukozturk S. Guideline for Data Analysis for Social Sciences. Ankara: Pegem A Publishing; 2008.
• [23] Bartlett MS. Tests of significance in factor analysis. British Journal of Statistical Psychology. 1950;3:77−85.
• [24] Kaiser H. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika. 1974;39:31−36.
• [25] Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using Multivariate Statistics. Sixth Edition, USA: Pearson Education Limited; 2014.
• [26] Gorsuch RL. Factor Analysis. Second Edition, New York: Psychology Press; 2008.
• [27] Coughlin KB, Kromrey J, Hibbard S. Using Predetermined Factor Structures to Simulate a Variety of Data Conditions. Florida: Paper presented at the annual meeting of South East SAS User Group; 2013.
• [28] Hogarty KY, Hines CV, Kromrey JD, et al. The quality of factor solutions in exploratory factor analysis: the influence of sample size, commuanltiy, and overdetermination. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 2005;65:202−226.
• [29] Tavsancil E. Measurement of Attitudes and Data Analysis with SPSS. Fifth Edition, Ankara: Nobel Publishing; 2014.
• [30] Ozdamar K. Statistical Analysis with Package Programs. Ninth Edition, Ankara: April Bookstore; 2013.
• [31] Munro BH. Statistical Methods for Health Care Research. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2005: 51−76.
• [32] Simsek OF. Introduction to Structural Equation Modeling, Fundamental Principles and Lisrel Applications. Ankara: Ekinoks; 2007: 4−22.
• [33] Gozum S, Aksayan S. Guideline for intercultural scale adaptation, psychometric characteristics and intercultural comparison. Journal of Research and Development in Nursing. 2003;5:3−14.
• [34] Tezbasaran AA. Likert Type Scale Development Guide. Second Edition, Ankara: Turkish Psychologists Association Publishing; 1997.
• [35] Ercan I, Kan I. Reliability and validity in scales. Journal of Uludag University Medical Faculty. 2004;30:211−216.